.

Introduction
Power has been extracted from the wind over hundreds of years with historic designs,
known as windmills, constructed from wood, cloth and stone for the purpose of pumping
water or grinding corn. Historic designs, typically large, heavy and inefficient, were replaced
in the 19th century by fossil fuel engines and the implementation of a nationally distributed
power network. A greater understanding of aerodynamics and advances in materials,
particularly polymers, has led to the return of wind energy extraction in the latter half of the
20th century. Wind power devices are now used to produce electricity, and commonly
termed wind turbines.
The orientation of the shaft and rotational axis determines the first classification of the
wind turbine. A turbine with a shaft mounted horizontally parallel to the ground is known
as a horizontal axis wind turbine or (HAWT). A vertical axis wind turbine (VAWT) has its
shaft normal to the ground (Figure 1)

The two configurations have instantly distinguishable rotor designs, each with its own
favourable characteristics [1]. The discontinued mainstream development of the VAWT can be
attributed to a low tip speed ratio and difficulty in controlling rotor speed. Difficulties in the
starting of vertical turbines have also hampered development, believed until recently to be
incapable of self-starting [2]. However, the VAWT requires no additional mechanism to face the
wind and heavy generator equipment can be mounted on the ground, thus reducing tower loads.
Therefore, the VAWT is not completely disregarded for future development. A novel V-shaped
VAWT rotor design is currently under investigation which exploits these favourable attributes
[3]. This design is currently unproven on a megawatt scale, requiring several years of
development before it can be considered competitive. In addition to the problems associated with
alternative designs, the popularity of the HAWT can be attributed to increased rotor control
through pitch and yaw control. The HAWT has therefore emerged as the dominant design
configuration, capitalised by all of today’s leading large scale turbine manufacturers.

2. Theoretical Maximum Efficiency

High rotor efficiency is desirable for increased wind energy extraction and should be
maximised within the limits of affordable production. Energy (P) carried by moving air is
expressed as a sum of its kinetic energy [Equation (1)]:
P=12ρAV3ρ=Air DensityA=Swept areaV=Air Velocity
(1)
A physical limit exists to the quantity of energy that can be extracted, which is independent of
design. The energy extraction is maintained in a flow process through the reduction of kinetic
energy and subsequent velocity of the wind. The magnitude of energy harnessed is a function of
the reduction in air speed over the turbine. 100% extraction would imply zero final velocity and
therefore zero flow. The zero flow scenario cannot be achieved hence all the winds kinetic
energy may not be utilised. This principle is widely accepted [4,5] and indicates that wind
turbine efficiency cannot exceed 59.3%. This parameter is commonly known as the power
coefficient Cp, where max Cp = 0.593 referred to as the Betz limit [6]. The Betz theory assumes
constant linear velocity. Therefore, any rotational forces such as wake rotation, turbulence
caused by drag or vortex shedding (tip losses) will further reduce the maximum efficiency.
Efficiency losses are generally reduced by:
 Avoiding low tip speed ratios which increase wake rotation
 Selecting aerofoils which have a high lift to drag ratio
 Specialised tip geometries
In depth explanation and analysis can be found in the literature [4,6].

3. Propulsion
The method of propulsion critically affects the maximum achievable efficiency of the rotor.
Historically, the most commonly utilised method was drag, by utilising a sail faced normal to
the wind, relying on the drag factor (Cd) to produce a force in the direction of the prevailing
wind. This method proved inefficient as the force and rotation of the sail correspond to the
wind direction; therefore, the relative velocity of the wind is reduced as rotor speed increases
(Table 1).

Table 1. The two mechanisms of propulsion compared.

Practical Efficiency
In practice rotor designs suffer from the accumulation of minor losses resulting from:
 Tip losses
 Wake effects
 Drive train efficiency losses
 Blade shape simplification losses
Therefore, the maximum theoretical efficiency has yet to be achieved [9]. Over the
centuries many types of design have emerged, and some of the more distinguishable are
listed in Table 2. The earliest designs, Persian windmills, utilised drag by means of sails
made from wood and cloth. These Persian windmills were principally similar to their
modern counterpart the Savonius rotor (No. 1) which can be seen in use today in ventilation
cowls and rotating advertising signs. Similar in principle is the cup type differential drag
rotor (No. 2), utilised today by anemometers for calculating airspeed due to their ease of
calibration and multidirectional operation. The American farm windmill (No. 3) is an early
example of a high torque lift driven rotor with a high degree of solidity, still in use today for
water pumping applications. The Dutch windmill (No. 4) is another example of an early lift
type device utilised for grinding corn which has now disappeared from mainstream use, yet
a small number still survive as tourist attractions. The Darrieus VAWT (No. 5) is a modern
aerodynamic aerofoil blade design which despite extensive research and development has so
far been unable to compete with the modern HAWT design, although recent developments
[2,3] could see a resurgence of this rotor type. Due to its efficiency and ease of control, the
aerofoil three bladed HAWT (No. 6) has become the wind turbine industry benchmark, with
a fully established international supply chain securing its dominance for the foreseeable
futur
HAWT Blade Design
A focus is now being made on the HAWT due to its dominance in the wind turbine
industry. HAWT are very sensitive to changes in blade profile and design. This section
briefly discusses the major parameters that influence the performance of HAWT blades.
5.1. Tip Speed Ratio
The tip speed ratio defined as the relationship between rotor blade velocity and relative wind
velocity [Equation (2)] is the foremost design parameter around which all other optimum rotor
dimensions are calculated:

(2)
Aspects such as efficiency, torque, mechanical stress, aerodynamics and noise should be
considered in selecting the appropriate tip speed (Table 3). The efficiency of a turbine can be
increased with higher tip speeds [4], although the increase is not significant when considering
some penalties such as increased noise, aerodynamic and centrifugal stress (Table 3).

Table 3. Tip speed ratio design considerations.

5.3. Configuration
A favourable reduction in rotor nacelle weight and manufacturing costs occur with the use
of fewer blades [16]. However, dynamic structural and balancing difficulties of the polar
asymmetrical rotor are apparent [16]. Increased wear, inferior aesthetic qualities and bird
conservation problems are also associated with one and two bladed rotors [17,18]. The three
blade turbine (Figure 5) has been widely adopted (Table 4) as the most efficient design to
meet environmental, commercial and economic constraints and therefore dominates today’s
large scale wind turbine industry. Modern commercially available wind turbines include
complex control and safety systems, remote monitoring and maintenance with provision for
the survival of lightning strike
Aerodynamic performance is fundamental for efficient rotor design [19]. Aerodynamic lift
is the force responsible for the power yield generated by the turbine and it is therefore
essential to maximise this force using appropriate design. A resistant drag force which
opposes the motion of the blade is also generated by friction which must be minimised. It is
then apparent that an aerofoil section with a high lift to drag ratio [Equation (4)], typically
greater than 30 [20], be chosen for rotor blade design [19]:
lift to Drug Ratio = Coefficient of liftCoefficient of drag = CLCD
(4)
 The co-efficient for the lift and drag of aerofoils is difficult to predict mathematically,
although freely available software, such as XFOIL [21] model results accurately with the
exception of post stall, excessive angles of attack and aerofoil thickness conditions [ 22,23].
Traditionally aerofoils are tested experimentally with tables correlating lift and drag at given
angles of attack and Reynolds numbers [24]. Historically wind turbine aerofoil designs have
been borrowed from aircraft technologies with similar Reynolds numbers and section
thicknesses suitable for conditions at the blade tip. However, special considerations should
be made for the design of wind turbine specific aerofoil profiles due to the differences in
operating conditions and mechanical loads.
The effects of soiling have not been considered by aircraft aerofoils as they generally fly at
altitudes where insects and other particulates are negligible. Turbines operate for long
periods at ground level where insect and dust particulate build up is problematic. This build
up known as fouling can have detrimental effects on the lift generated. Provision is therefore
made for the reduced sensitivity to fouling of wind turbine specific aerofoil designs [ 25].
The structural requirements of turbine blades signify that aerofoils with a high thickness
to chord ratio be used in the root region. Such aerofoils are rarely used in the aerospace
industry. Thick aerofoil sections generally have a lower lift to drag ratio. Special
consideration is therefore made for increasing the lift of thick aerofoil sections for use in
wind turbine blade designs [25,26].
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) four and five digit designs have
been used for early modern wind turbines [1]. The classification shows the geometric profile
of a NACA aerofoil where the 1st digit refers to maximum chamber to chord ratio, 2nd digit
is the camber position in tenths of the chord and the 3rd & 4th digits are the maximum
thickness to chord ratio in percent [24]. The emergence of wind turbine specific aerofoils
such as the Delft University [23], LS, SERI-NREL and FFA [6] and RISO [26] now provide
alternatives specifically tailored to the needs of the wind turbine industry.
The angle of attack is the angle of the oncoming flow relative to the chord line, and all
figures for CL and CD are quoted relative to this angle. The use of a single aerofoil for the
entire blade length would result in inefficient design [19]. Each section of the blade has a
differing relative air velocity and structural requirement and therefore should have its
aerofoil section tailored accordingly. At the root, the blade sections have large minimum
thickness which is essential for the intensive loads carried resulting in thick profiles.
Approaching the tip blades blend into thinner sections with reduced load, higher linear
velocity and increasingly critical aerodynamic performance. The differing aerofoil
requirements relative to the blade region are apparent when considering airflow velocities
and structural loads